This is why I wish a company like UBI would step in, take over the IP and give it to Ubi Montreal (FC2, Rainbow Six vegas, etc).

FarCry 2 looks stunning and runs brilliantly, as well as incorporating some great improvements to the genre. The only problem is the gameplay is a bit shallow and very repetitive in comparison to Clear Sky. A cross of the two games would be immense but I fear that targeting a console audience as well wouldn't be good for the franchise - how are you meant to deal with lots of items in the inventory or the large amount of text they deal with? If done well it could be brilliant, though.

For all its bugs and frustrations, Clear Sky is still worth the purchase. Theres very few games that I tolerate like that but the gameplay is just so compelling and atmosphere so immersive that I can put up with some bugs. I'm just pissed that GSC so sonsistantly ignores its player base the way it does. This was a development house that was on the verge of going belly up midway through STALKER: SoC until THQ stepped in with funding. You'd think they'd make a special effort to do everything they could to keep the IP in a positive light but they simply reverted back to this arrogant stance that we'll get what we get when they feel like it and not take any player concerns into account.

This is why I wish a company like UBI would step in, take over the IP and give it to Ubi Montreal (FC2, Rainbow Six vegas, etc).

I'm hoping there will be a patch in the near future that waters down the spawning a bit.

At least that isn't game ending. I've had some of the best fights from checkpoint attacks. But really I don't find them an issue. Most of the time I can just drive straight through, run over 1 or two enemies, and then outrun any cars that follow. But I've been using the boats and buses A LOT more to mix up the traveling, and even running (whatever route is fastest), so really the ambushes don't bother me much at all.

start growing weary of sneaking by/destroying the same checkpoints over and over again.

See unless you want to take them out every time, why would you? You can drive right through and outrun them, often with just 1 vehicle (2 enemies) following...easy to take out and only interrupts your travel for a few seconds.

If you can respect that, then don't tell me 'if I don't support them...etc, etc'. To me it is cut and dry, but it's also my decision, and everyone else can make their own. Release non-bug filled games and I'll gladly pay full price. Doesn't matter if you are a first time developer or have millions of dollars backing you up.

Why should I fork out $40 and not even to be able to play it for 6 more months due to bugs that require addressing? By that time it's down to $30 or less, and most likely being abandoned for the next title (see the transition from SoC to Clear Sky).

Nor am I going to support games with install limits with no revoke tool, ESPECIALLY from small developers/publishers, as they are more likely to go belly-up leaving the customers with dick in hand. The FUBAR nature of how the DRM issues were dealt with in the first 3 weeks of release were plenty enough to show me I had made the right decision.

That trailer made me giggle. I'm glad they're making that game just because it meant I got to see that trailer.

I'll support the small developers if they make quality products. I'm not really so concerned about DRM, but I wish I hadn't bought Clear Sky, not like this. I wouldn't like to think I was encouraging this sort of thing. I really lament the Eastern European development community--they've got the wherewithal and the desire to make true PC games, but they're getting a bad reputation for releasing buggy messes.

I hope White Gold turns out okay. I hear the Russian version recently released is pretty decent though, so maybe it's a good sign. Boiling Point would have been great if only it had worked.

Yes, that is what I should have done, and I really should have known better. I bought SOC the day it came out and I didn't have nearly as many problems as I have had with Clear Sky. I expected it to be buggy but not this buggy.

I still enjoyed playing it though, and I'm looking forward to playing it again. I just don't want to wear it out before I can have the full experience. Deep down it is really a fine game.

I've actually put Far Cry 2 on a similar hiatus, though not one so severe. I'm hoping there will be a patch in the near future that waters down the spawning a bit. Again, so that I can have a better experience the first time I fully play it. It's not really all that bad though. I'll still play it, only in half-hour spurts here and there, which is about how long it takes me to start growing weary of sneaking by/destroying the same checkpoints over and over again.

Fallout 3 is therefore a real godsend. It works pretty much as advertised right out of the box, and I should be able to get two or weeks out of that one for my first time through, barring any day-long gaming binges, which have been known to happen.

It's all worked out rather well these last couple weeks. Maybe by the time I work through Fallout 3, Far Cry 2 and then Grand Theft Auto 4, Clear Sky will be reasonably patched up and then I'll be set through the holidays. Throw in the odd bout of Street Fighter 4 and Left 4 Dead, and I may be square until summer.

I can respect that. But I don't think it is so cut and dry. For a company like EA, having a game as buggy as both Stalkers is unacceptable. For a new IP from a foreign country with an 8 man team, i don't think so. It would be like expecting Mount and Blade to have the quality of a Creative Assembly game, not gonna happen.

If you don't support these small developers at least, and use No CD/DVD hacks, you will be doomed to game like the following:

Well first I wasn't gonna get Clear Sky right away due to the history with Chernobyl, which I still found really buggy even though I waited almost a year to play it. On top of that were my own personal disappointments with several design choices.

Then the whole DRM thing on Steam. First it was released without any mention of the limits on Steam. Then when people discovered it and had a problem, it was back and forth between GSC and Steam Support with nobody getting clear answers.

What it boils down to is is if they are willing to have this kind of shoddy support, then I have no problem waiting until the game is a) cheaper and b) patched up c) and hopefully DRM removed before I drop money on it.

I'm glad that FC2 and Fallout3 came out when they did. I'd done one complete run through of Clear Sky, and I think it's great, but I don't want to play it for a while until it's fixed or at least as fixed as it is going to get.

Even though at this point it doesn't crash all that often (well, it isn't guaranteed to crash every time I play anymore), I still feel like I'm walking on eggshells in the game world just waiting for everything to go titsup at any moment. It kind of hampers the experience.

So, I'm going to put it down for a while. I think it's a tremendously good game in principle, they just need to sort it out so that it's also a good--or at least passable--game in practice as well.

I'm under the impression that this patch is not the one I'm waiting for. Maybe the next one.

I hear ya guys and i am pissed I was 10-15 hours into CS when a game ending bug hit me. One that thus far is rare but has not even been acknowledged by the GSC team. I still bought the game day one to show support, knowing I probably would regret it.

On the other hand, if this game doesn't sell within a reasonable amount of time, the game may never continue. That would suck even more! We can't always have AAA titles like MAss Effect and FAllout 3 (finished last night, not one patch!) but then again those companies have many more people working on the games.

Oh well. I still consider it money well spent on a struggling game company with a great idea.

Complaining is done simply as the ego's way of reinforcing its "rightness" and someone else's "wrongness."

Are you proposing that everybody agree with each other or never voice their criticism? If that were the case then there would be no politics, war, petitions, methods for dealing with official complaints, etc. Your statement is patently absurd and that you seek to belittle those with complaints is particularly ironic.

If they knew within a few hours of releasing the patch that there was a problem that needed to be addressed quickly, which is what it sounds like there was...then what's the point in releasing it on Steam when you know you will have another released in a few days to address the problem with the last patch? Would you rather they put the broken update through on Steam too?

Obviously no-one would ever want a broken patch. Still, if it was broken I would expect it to be recalled... it wasn't.

At some point consumer logic has to take over and you need to recognize that you had warnings and made the purchase anyways.

Wanting a patch sooner, particularly when it's already been created and released for retail users, is very different to regretting my purchase. Despite my complaints I had a brilliant time with Clear Sky and found it an incredibly enjoyable experience, hence why I want to play through it again. I prefer it overall to FarCry 2. Still, I wasn't expecting as many problems with Clear Sky - I expected them to have learnt from their mistakes, not to introduce more.

I wasn't aware it took 3 weeks for a patch to come to Steam, and without looking into that I'm not sure how accurate that info is. I seem to recall patches coming out before it hit North American shores...but don't know details.

Earlier patches were released promptly, though the actual game itself was delayed from the retail release. Us European gamers had to wait for the US release, which incorporated the early patches (which actually gave us a better experience and avoided the save breaking changes introduced earlier).

Sorry if I came across as very negative. My criticism is with the handling of patches on Steam, which should just be a case of the publishers handing over the files to Valve.

Responding to those who complain here with rational reasoning is an exercise in futility.

Not really, not if you have a mature individual on the other end. Theyarecomingforyou and I converse on shit all the time. We don't always agree.

If I had bought Clear Sky anyways, hoping for an improvement, I'd be rather pissed right now at how Clear Sky support hasn't been handled well. I wasn't aware it took 3 weeks for a patch to come to Steam, and without looking into that I'm not sure how accurate that info is. I seem to recall patches coming out before it hit North American shores...but don't know details.

Responding to those who complain here with rational reasoning is an exercise in futility.

Complaining is done simply as the ego's way of reinforcing its "rightness" and someone else's "wrongness." See it for what it is, ego boosting. They may not want to take personal responsibility for their purchase of a buggy game but instead to blame others. Instead of being grateful for the patch, whatever it contains, they pollute themselves and others with negativity. Of course, it's counter productive to complain.

Yep, I was a huge STALKER fan but I'm waiting it out for a better, more stable Clear Sky. I'm sure some nice mods, and hopefully one in the same vein as Oblivion Lost, will be released in time as well.

That's bad at the best of times, and considering it broke multiplayer compatibility, I'd say that was unacceptable.

And everyone should have learned this with GSC when it came to Chernobyl. I'm not defending them. But all this and more are the reasons why I have not yet bought Clear Sky. At some point consumer logic has to take over and you need to recognize that you had warnings and made the purchase anyways. So why be shocked when the same problems with Chernobyl are occurring with Clear Sky?